If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people - their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties - someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad; if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
- John F. Kennedy

Monday, May 25, 2009

Homegrown is Good

I get asked frequently why I spend so much time and effort on my vegetable garden. First, I enjoy the time playing in the dirt and watching things grow. Second, the taste, freshness and quality of homegrown food is amazing and will spoil you forever. Third, it's very economical. I can grow a huge amount of food for a very small outlay of actual cash. There is a lot of "sweat" invested true, but people spend a lot of money paying some gym for the same. Lastly, over and over research is showing that growing your own vegetables and fruit using natural and organic principles, especially if they are heirloom varieties, gives you a lot more nutritional 'bang for the buck' than the gracery store stuff, fresh or processed. The commercially grown vegetables, fruits and grains that we are eating today are significantly less nutritious than these foods were 100 years ago, or even just 30 years ago.

In wheat and barley, protein concentrations declined by 30 to 50 percent between the years 1938 and 1990.

Likewise, a study of 45 corn varieties developed from 1920 to 2001, grown side by side, found that the concentrations of protein, oil and three amino acids have all declined in the newer varieties.

Six minerals have declined by 22 to 39 percent in 14 widely grown wheat varieties developed over the past 100 years.

Official U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) nutrient data shows that the calcium content of broccoli averaged 12.9 milligrams per gram of dry weight in 1950, but only 4.4 mg/g dry weight in 2003.

All of this evidence has been assembled and rigorously reviewed by Dr. Donald R. Davis, a now (mostly) retired chemist from the University of Texas.

So what’s causing these declines? The evidence indicates there are at least two forces at work. The first is what agriculture researchers call the environmental “dilution effect.” Davis notes that researchers have known since the 1940s that yield increases produced by fertilization, irrigation and other environmental means used in industrial farming tend to decrease the concentrations of minerals in those plants. These techniques give growers higher yields, and consumers get less expensive food. But now it appears there’s a hidden long-term cost — lowered food quality.

For example, a study of phosphorous fertilizer on raspberries found that applying high levels of phosphorus caused the yield to double and concentrations of phosphorus to increase in the plants, but meanwhile levels of eight other minerals declined by 20 to 55 percent!

The other force at work is what Davis calls the genetic dilution effect — the decline in nutrient concentration that results when plant breeders develop high-yielding varieties without a primary focus on broad nutrient content. That’s what the studies of wheat, corn and broccoli confirm.